Okay, nobody gets to be a better fan by liking or not liking the movies, just so long as nobody who considers themselves a tolkgeek says "But they didn't change anything and they just filmed the book" which is a blatant lie. You can like both, it's not a sin, they're very different things, but you can be just as big a fan and like both (and even the Bakshi movie and Rankin/Bass if you like). Otherwise you are like the Trek fans who claim all other sci-fi is rubbish and ripped off, and the Star Wars fans who laugh at the Trek fans and call them geeks, simply because Trek stayed very cultish and is never going to be cool and mainstream like Star Wars.
Oh and something else I've always wanted to say, claiming that the Sil is your favourite Tolkien book if it isn't does not make you seem more of a pure Tolkien fan, it makes you like the man who fills his bookshelves with literature (shakespeare, Austen, Eliot, Wordsworth, Blake etc. etc.) and never reads them, just shows them to his friends. I know none of us here are guilty of this particular sin, as all those here who claim it is their favourite seem to have more than enough evidence to prove your point. I have just come across it as one-upmanship in other places before, and found it laughable (yeah, I prefer a lengthy boring historical document better than a beautifully crafted tale of danger and questing and swords and battles and sweeping you along with the momentum type thing. Okay some people do.
Please can we not do the "My Dad's bigger than your Dad" thing with Tolkien. And stick with the "purist" description, which I think works perfectly well for fans like Ross. Though I get your joke perfectly Ross, others with no knowledge of religions may think it less funny.
And Prog, I think you're over-analysing.